Introduction
How do you know when you are being steered? I mean steered by the shapers and molders of the bleeding edge contempo-evangelical conscience, which would be, of course, the devil.
The Basic Move
You know that you are being steered when positions that were demanded of you x number of years ago are now positions that you are commanded to relinquish instanter, so that you can stop being a hater.
You are a fundamentalist hater for taking the very same position on same sex mirage that was held just a few years ago by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. They get to evolve over the years because no one ever believed them anyway, but apply a few court cases and blammo, evangelicals are required to do the same thing by means of punctuated equilibria. Evangelicals who go along with this are what theologians of another era like Owen or Turretin would have called “hopeful monsters.”
Not only so, you were a hater just a few years ago for predicting that religious liberty was threatened in the most radical ways by the homo-jihad, and you are a hater now for pointing out that it is all coming to pass, just as predicted. You were hated for being a hater when you were wrong and when you were right on the same issue. Nice work if you can get it.
A few years ago it was “Shut up, that could never happen.” Now it is just plain old shut up.
A Bit of Silver Lining
But now for the good news. We are entering a generation which will exact an actual cost for being the kind of Christian who is unembarrassed by things the Bible says. The fact is the Bible does say that for a man to lie with another man as with a woman is an abomination (Lev. 20:13), that Israel should not suffer a witch to live (Ex. 22:18), that God flooded the entire globe good and wet for their experiments in federally-funded genetic splicing (Gen. 6:4), that Christian slaves were instructed to work doubly hard for their Christian masters (1 Tim. 6:2), and that women in combat roles was beyond appalling (Dt. 22:5). There is a kind of Christian who believes that exegesis of such passages is not done by licking a finger and holding it up in the breeze.
Yeah, my interlocutor might say, but if the Bible taught that the earth was a flat disk rocking precariously on the back of an enormous turtle, would you believe that too? The answer is that 1. It doesn’t teach that, and 2. If it did we would have found the turtle by now, and your argument would be invalid, having failed empirically.
But I have a question for you. If Science (all rise!) taught a few years ago that the habitable earth would be destroyed by 2016 because of rising sea levels caused by your recklessness in asking Holiday Inn to wash the towels, would you believe that? Thought so. The most highly educated generation in forever is running around investigating why it is getting hotter when it isn’t, and on top of that they exclude from their calculations of possible causes the fact that there is a flaming ball of fire in the sky.
I have a better one. If all the approved scientists in the world tell you that a boy can just decide that he is a girl, and that if he does so you must use the appropriate pronoun while referring to zat — is that the right pronoun? I can’t keep up anymore — and that if you refuse then it is off to the prison mines of Ganymede for you, do you go along with the bogus pronouns? I mentioned the approved scientists. There are in fact unapproved ones, but they are all here in the universal joy camps with me, where we share our pork and beans. When we have been uncooperative with the guards, there are times when we have to share our pork and bean. We use our mealtimes to reflect soberly on whether we will try to be good when we get out this next time.
The intoleristas try to laugh me to scorn because of this persecution complex I have. “Ha! ha! loser!” is how their counterargument goes. But keep in mind the fact that every step in this sexual revolution is one that has lied its head off about what was going to happen at the next stage.
This has happened year after year, and so by this point anybody who believes that it is impossible for laws to be passed outlawing any expression of “hate speech” whatever is somebody who really ought to be the protagonist in Gullible’s Travels. Couple this with the fact that hate speech would necessarily be defined so as to include a sober exegetical handling of Romans 1 from the pulpit, and you have all the ingredients of a totalitolerant hellhole. Progressives love free speech the way parasitoid wasps love caterpillars.
Tertullian had their number. “If the Tiber rises too high, or the Nile too low, the remedy is always feeding Christians to the lions.” We are up against Babylon, not Athens.
I Got Distracted. This is the Silver Linings Section.
But I said there was good news. It was here a minute ago. Ah, I remember. It is that all those believers who were actually unbelievers, the ones upon whom the world’s cool shame actually works, will have headed down the road to more welcoming places. A welcoming place is defined as one where you can hump whatever you want, blame the resultant disease on whomever you want, and get a government subsidy to make up for your courageous suffering whenever you want.
There are three kinds of professing Christians. The first, already apparent, is made up of those who are prepared to do whatever our new overlords demand. Think of a protesting line of Lesbyterians in colorful robes and stoles celebrating abortion.
The second category is made up of those who are doing a respectable amount of growling, but who are preparing to accommodate themselves to the new demands once the law is finally “settled.” “Shadrach, you are going to get all of us in trouble! Romans 13, man! Just take a quick knee and nod.”
The third category is made up of those who will not bow, who will not even think about bending. Those in the third group are preparing themselves to disregard every tyrannical edict. We will not do as you say. We will not cooperate. And the number of this group is far larger than anyone could have guessed from how things have been going. Remember Elijah and the 7,000.
Good news? It is this. This third group is going to conquer the world. They have done an amazing amount of good work over the last several centuries. It will be hard to imagine what they will be able to do once liberated from all the deadwood.
This was brilliant. Thank you Doug.
“The second category is made up of those who are doing a respectable
amount of growling, but who are preparing to accommodate themselves to
the new demands once the law is finally “settled.””
And they’re the ones we seem to have more problems with–they’re actually our brothers and sisters in Christ!
(as contrasted with the first group, that is)
Encouraging post, Doug.
As other commentators have pointed out recently, the “separation of church and state” doesn’t seem to have done much to improve either.
How are things in Russia (your example of a better western nation)? Haha.
Russia isn’t a western nation, exactly. And its church is doing much better at resisting worldliness than Roman or Protestant churches, so far as I can tell.
The church is doing better there huh? 7% church attendance, brah. That is pathetic. And how did that church you view as so steller do when it was sucking up to Stalin (or the Czar before that)? 7% of the people attend the church there because the church there is worthless.
40% of the US attends church in the US. 26% attend conservative protestant churches all of which are worth more on a bad day that the Eastern Orthodox sell outs on their best.
As an attendee of a conservative protestant church in the US, I find your implication that they’re any less “sell outs” than the Eastern Orthodox quite amusing.
What denomination? I have no doubt that the US has more than 7% of our population attending good churches. I know Russians and they are the first to say the church is pretty weak over there.
Also, if your measure of the worth of a church is its attendance numbers, you might want to re-check some of the things Jesus and the Apostles said about popularity.
Osteen’s whippin’ tail!
A true US church success story!
So, what part of the church in Russia do you think is healthy? They kowtowed to Stalin, they are doctrinally very confused, and their evangelistic efforts have failed. What is the strength that you seem to think they have?
Resistance to the liberalism of the “International Community” is what I was referring to. http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/06/27/sunk-vatican-ii/ offers a good perspective on some of that.
I don’t mean that they couldn’t improve. Just that they have succeeded in this aspect more than American churches have.
His “All Holiness” Bartholomew is the one you are thinking is a some sort of bulwark huh? Haha.
Eastern orthodoxy has plenty of liberals in their ranks. They may be better than Rome but they are way to the left of Southern Baptists (or PCA for that matter).
I would appreciate reading matter on this topic.
They permit evolution as a teaching. They do not hold to the inerrant/literal interpretation of the bible. They allow bishops to make liberal statements on abortion without discipline:
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/10/a-not-so-pro-life-patriarch
And they gave an honors and award to Joe Freakin Biden.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/orthodox-leaders-protest-ecumenical-patriarch-honoring-vp-joe-biden
Like I said, they are not horrible (better than most mainline protestants and probably better than Rome) but they are more liberal that many Protestant denominations.
Not to mention all the Eastern Orthodox nonsense like bowing down to icons, praying to Mary, and all the “His all holiness” crap.
If you find a church with no nonsense whatsoever, they probably wouldn’t let either of us join.
A lot of arguments I’ve seen against the RC, EO, or RO is that they really suck at being Protestant, and that’s pretty much the worst thing ever.
My complaint (and the reason I have no sympathy with people like Rod Dreher from Protestant backgrounds who go RC/Orthodox) is that they’re not in communion with Protestant churches. The rest of the differences aren’t any worse than what you’ll find in many Protestant churches.
As Leithart says, “Too catholic to be Catholic”
No problems with people bowing down to images huh? How open minded of you.
Well, if certain things Protestants reformed were good (ie not calling bishops ‘His Holiness’ and not bowing down to images) then that is a legit argument. But I will say that there is a great historical argument against EO (and RC) as well. The Jews of the first century were so anti image they did not even allow an image of the king on their coins. The Christians continued this tradition. The first three centuries neither icons or statues were used in worship and all the major Christian theologians spoke against them. In the fourth and fifth centuries, images began… Read more »
I can find plenty of churches where they do not call their bishops “his all holiness” and spend all their time bowing down to images.
Not only so, you were a hater just a few years ago for predicting that religious liberty was threatened in the most radical ways by the homo-jihad, and you are a hater now for pointing out that it is all coming to pass, just as predicted. Conservatives, especially conservative Christians need to be doing a lot more “I told you so”-ing. Not in the “nah nah nah” way, but to broadcast the truth that our side is right on a LOT of things, and by extension, that the other side is lying to you. Obamacare is an abject failure –… Read more »
Jig, truth is a hard sell!
Just as God has always said.
That’s why the words of the wise are like goads, poking sheep in the right direction.
That’s true, but there are some who have no idea that such things were even said in the first place. Forget having the floor, we aren’t even invited in the room!
That’s a good point. It’s hard to imagine but there really are people who have no idea such things were ever said. They have very little awareness of Christianity at all and what little they do know has mostly been fed to them by the media.
I approve of this message. Let’s extend it further,and see how far back it goes.
What predictions did the losing side of each major political and cultural conflict in our history make? How accurate were they, compared to the predictions of the winners? We can play this game with sodomite marriage, gun control, racial integration, women’s suffrage, the Constitution, the American Revolution, etc etc.
History wasn’t just written by the victors. Get out there and read old books.
And one last thing. Since Trump will secure the GOP nomination shortly, isn’t now the time to start working towards making a viable 3rd party for 2020? When Alec Baldwin decides in 2019 that he’s a pro-life conservative and by April 2020 he’s got 1237 delagates, it’ll be too late again.
Yes, it is time, but who’s going to start working in that direction? It has to be somebody who knows how. Is it too much to hope for that there will be some defections from the GOP by men who have already proven to be viable candidates?
“Viable third party” is the unicorn of American politics. Often wished for, never attained. (For good reason.)
Yeah, and why now? The #NeverTrumpCrybaby movement is a joke. It’s mostly made up of neocons who had no problem with the Doles, Bushes, Romneys and McCains
“Progressives love free speech the way parasitoid wasps love caterpillars.”
I must testify to the fact that compliance does not work. It seems like a perfectly valid feminine way to respond, just smile politely and pretend you agree, but it doesn’t work. It’s your mere existence that offends them. So as you can see, complying with a parasitic wasp is not really an option.
Or to put it another way, it’s your Lord that offends them. Psalm 2, the kings of the earth take counsel against God and His Annointed. They hate God so they hate His servants.
“We will not do as you say. We will not cooperate.” Except for the first command of corporate worship.
Ever bold. Thank you.
There are days when I read these posts and think they would make excellent dramatic readings. ala, ‘But Brutus was an honorable man!’
Bravo.
Would one say the third group is going to conquer the world if they’re not postmillenial? Would it be more accurate for such folks to say that Jesus is going to conquer the world as we cheer Him on?
I was beginning to think that this stuff was really “not all that bad” just yet, but after getting yelled at and taught how to behave as a Christian by a radical lezbo on Friday, I find that we are headed to the sensitivity camps sooner than later. See you guys there.
I won’t. Either me or the lezbo will be dead.
Reconsider. You’re no good to us dead.
Be of good cheer. God is here.
To those who see a post mill post: Why call it post-mill that the saints will inherit the earth or that by their faith they will overcome the world or that the wheat will remain or that of the increase of His Government there will be no end.
If this is not the hope, then what is?
Great post Doug. It has helped firm up my faith and boldness.
A nice Australian approach to giving offence to the easily offended.
https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co/videos/1238771789467711/